Note: This topic has been unedited for 3037 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

First off, sorry y'all because this isn't my style, but I've finally had enough....

We have spent a year or so going back and forth about Euroipods. I've never picked a side - frankly I don't care enough. But what I do care about is the fucking ED style drama and dickery that this fucking article stirs up. For most people, it's not an issue. For Nintendorulez and a few others, it is.

So, although I do it rarely, I'm pulling rank, and making a determined compromise in order to cull all the bitching, once and for all.

To begin, Nintendorulez and I have never really seen eye-to-eye. It's no secret that we're probably not on each other's christmas list. However, if I am to kill this god-dammed drama for good, one of two things has to happen:

1) Nintendorulez gets the permaban, as does anyone else who complains.

2) The three letters (Nin) he so vigorously objects to in Euroipods must get removed.

Now normally, I'd go with route #1. However, I do feel that Nin has at least some valid (although EDishly overblown) complaints about the article. In the essence of not-fairness, I've decided on the following:

I'm whacking the "Nin" in the article. In exchange, Nintendorulez becomes my whipping boy. He will:

Be civil, polite, and talk civilly and constructively to users, and avoid reverting their changes at all costs.

Avoid quote spamming, template abuse, and other destructive edits.

Stop fucking around with voting pages, making stupid nominations, etc.

If anyone notes Nin failing to do any of these things, let me know. I am now officially his master.

I rarely stick my neck out for a user, much less one that I have historically not gotten along with. However, I'm willing to do so if I can kill this damned drama, and get a clear benefit out of it. If any of the rest of you have a major issue with this, let me know. I'm giving it a day for comment before implementation. SirFamine,Gun♣Petition»12/2 01:18

Good, thank you. This is all I've been trying to do all along: I don't want to take sides on the argument, I only know that removing the names will end it. Though I might point out that there's more than nin's name on there now, and perhaps removing them all would be wise. This, barring anything really important I need to reply to, will be my last entry to the euroipods discussion, assuming your suggestion is actually implemented. Thanks again. •Spang•☃•talk•01:37, 2 Dec 2006

Muddier than I thought it was

As someone who pretty much ignores the PMSing of the rest of you, and just tries to keep shit running, I was not aware of the full scale of the petty bickering and extensive dickery that has gone on here. For that, I apologize. I would not have tried to stamp this out in this way if I had fully understood how many people were home holding their teddy and crying.

Like I said above, I rarely bother myself with the bickering of you folks, but this shit has to stop. While I may not garner any friends this way, I, for one, am brave enough to state publicly what I see as problems, and call some folks out:

Nintendorulez: Three letters of your name in one article out of 20,000 is a completely and utterly retarded thing to be carrying on about. Not that these problems with everyone else wouldn't have cropped up anyway, but still. Damn man, let it go.

User:Spang: You dumb motherfucker. I'm generally pretty supportive of your work here, but in this instance, you doused yourself in fuel and decided to go take a smoke break.

First, you pretty much started this all with an undiscussed change in Euroipods. It's been enough of a lightning rod that I would have expected you to have been a little smarter than that. This is like politics. Talk to a bunch of people, and get some popular support. Then when a handful of people have issues, you have a coalition rather than find yourself all alone.

After the first time, you went and reverted three more times, once blanking out the offending testimonials. All without discussion, it seems. Remember that bit up above about the coalition?

I understand your thought process behind adding everyone to the special rules page. In my eyes, it's decently fair, because a number of them are just as guilty about fanning the flames. But once again, it seems to have been done all on your own, without any real discussion. And really just managed to piss off User:Hinoa4.

To cap it off, you unbanned User:Some user without talking to User:Elvis about it first, thus pissing him off. While I understand your reasoning there, it smells of backstabbing and favoritism, with marked disrespect for the other admins.

All in all, you have acted unilaterally, and without any sort of discussion, and have managed to alienate a bunch of the admins here. That is not a good thing. I don't know what to tell you. I have no words of advice on how to fix it.

User:Some user: By and large, you are one of the most successful trolls we've ever had. A talented writer, I just wish you'd use your powers for good, rather than evil. You've managed to piss off just about everyone on allsides of the debate, with articles and posts designed solely to stir up ill-will and angst. Without your irresponsible, antagonistic, and devious meddling into this affair, I doubt that it would have spiraled down this far.

You are so good at this, we really need to keep you around. But you are so divisive, I do not know that it's worth it.

User:Elvis: You took the bait, hook, link, and sinker. SU did a fantastic job getting you riled up. I don't blame you for banning him - he did a great job of yanking your chain. I just wish you'd stated so in the block log, and maybe, just maybe Spang wouldn't have unblocked him, and stirred up more shit. Overall, you've let yourself get drawn into a pissing match, where you responded by being a raging asshole. Granted it was provoked, but it was still being an asshole. In the process, you've pissed off a number of users and admins, which is not a good thing.

User:Hrodulf: WTF is wrong with you? You blew up and spewed shit all over the Euroipods forum. I have no idea where that came from, but damn. You need some midol or something. Did that and your posts to the euroipods talk page help? No. Not at all.

User:Famine: Pointing fingers is a good way to piss off a lot of people, and further divide the userbase. Rarely does it solve problems without starting another whole round of flame wars. Additionally, unilaterally deciding on things without discussion does not make the other admins happy. Even if you did so before noting new changes which may or may not have general admin support. Of course, it is hard to tell how much support something has when, instead of publicly talking about it, it was decided by:

The Cabal: Perhaps the root of the whole problem. I've been sitting on this for a year or so now, and I think it's time:

The Cabal does nothing to truly help Uncyclopedia. While I understand that it's a quick and convenient way to check in with some other admins, it leaves the rest of us out in the cold, with no idea wtf is going on, who decided on what, nor how much support any idea has. If you institute new rules, we have no idea where they came from, nor how they were formulated. We haven't had a chance to voice our opinion, nor offer suggestions.

The Cabal has got to stop. What we need more than anything here is transparency, and open discussion. We need to see who supports what, we need to bring problems out into the open, and we need to communicate. On IRC, there is no record of who said what, what their reasoning was, nor what their exact words were. For a website that relies on history and tracking submissions, that is completely opposite what we need.

Continue to use IRC. By all means, rally support, but direct people to the appropriate post for public comment. We need transparency and communication here badly. Stop the "a bunch of us on IRC decided" bullshit. Bring it out in the open for general discussion. There are few things that need to be said that can't be said publicly, if you are acting responsibly, and in the best interest of this website.

We badly need a permanent resolution to the Euroipods issue. As noted above, about all of us acted like bitchy little 7-year olds in the matter. Adding a dozen names to the special rules page does nothing to fix the problem - it just fuels the flames.

My proposal is to change the testimonials to fake names, lock the page, lock the talk page, and wipe Euroipods off the special rules page. All this with the understanding that if the general dickery and unsportsmanlike like behavior on the part of all of us continues, we will openly discuss whether that person or persons are valuable enough to Uncyclopedia to keep around. SirFamine,Gun♣Petition»12/2 17:24

Elvis, you're all over the place here... Whilst I understand your opinion on every one user on your list, there are some I don't agree with. However, I will not make attempt to sway you in that area. Instead, I would like to ask you to not go. I know this request does not mean much, as we're not really in eachother's neighbourhood that often, but never the less I don't believe we will be better off without your help.

In particular, I fully agree with your cabal-statement. It is due to the "power" of the small group of sysops and selected users, and the subsequent lack of community involvement that I have given up most of my hopes for this site. Though I briefly looked around for more users uninvolved or against the "cabal", it seemed there weren't enough to potentially stage an effective protest. I also didn't want to disturb the peace, potentially creating two clear-cut groups of sysops.

In short: I urge you to stay. I know all the stress isn't worth it, but would rather work on resolving the source of the problem, rather than see good people leave one by one. Take care. ⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ignSTFUF@H|CM|+S 20:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Bugger... Seems I was wrong about who wrote all that stuff up there... My bad, and I appologize (though retain what I said). Elvis, you're still a good man, and I would like you to stay. ⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ignSTFUF@H|CM|+S 21:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Famine, when I first changed the name, there was discussion on the euroipods talk page, and as far as I remember, nobody was saying they really wanted the name kept. So I changed it, it was changed back by an unknown sockpuppet, with still nothing added to the discussion on the talk page, so reverted it. The removal of the testimonials was a legitimate restructuring of the bottom of the article into the hideaway section, where there was already a testimonials section with no users' names on. So it made sense just to take the extra one out, and only after that I started realising just how much the "nin" reference meant to certain people. Remember I was only made an admin 6 months after the original euroipods debate. I didn't realise it was still such an issue. That is my fault. But everything I did, I did because I thought it was the right thing to do, or at least most right for the most number of people at the time. After I realised how big an issue it still was, I went and joined the discussion, which I seems to have been the wrong thing too. This is how I remember it, it may be wrong. I may have been wrong in some actions, but I thought they were right at the time, and a single message on my talk page from anyone who had a problem would have been enough for me to at least explain my actions and why I did them. Don't "punish" me for doing wrong if nobody told me I was doing wrong in the first place; I thought that after my second change was reverted I was doing the right thing by taking it to the relevant discussions, and nobody told me I shouldn't have done that. I'm sorry if I can seem pretty foreful with my opinions, but that's just the way I am; I'll try to tone it down and be more nicer in future. •Spang•☃•talk•21:26, 2 Dec 2006

Famine, I'm in complete agreement with you here. A stupid little injoke like this one is not worth anywhere near this much headache. This crap needs to stop, and stop now. --Algorithm 03:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

So, 1) for those of us who really don't give a crap what is on the Euroipods page, but would like less drama, is it over now? Can I stop caring yet? 2) I would like to defend User:Famine from the viscious critique leveled against him by.... uh... User:Famine. Publically stated Unilateralism has its time and place, as long as one is willing to discuss it afterwards and is open to change. Let's not forget, there has to be something to combat the force of laziness. Sometimes that force is unilateralism. 3) I would like to publicly state that I agree with this particular unilateral action by Famine, and that I said something supporting that course of action god-knows-where and god-knows-how-long-ago. ---Rev. Isra(talk) 18:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I am missing something really large here, but to me this seems like a pretty clear cut decision. Nintendo didnt want "Nin" in the article, and while some have made the case that its just three letters, these letters obviously were referring to Nintendo and he obviously wanted them gone. Its just common curtesy, I have seen some say that some high up admins liked seeing him complain, but I dont really see why they would since it causes stuff like this. This issue seems to have gotten complicated by an unwillingness to just do what was common curtesy and instead a willingness to see how complicated things could be made. Not having followed the situation as it happened, I dont know who has left over this, and who has been banned over this, but it seems so ridiculous to me that such an easy issue was allowed to deteriorate to this point when the solution is so blatently clear. Just giving a look at the article now, the reference to Nintendo is gone. Just think where wed be if his request was simply honored at the start. If everyone applies this logic to every other issue that is this simple, and there will never again be ED style drama here. ~Sir RangeleyGUNWotMUotMEGA+S (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)